The institution's admission of the petitioners was in accordance with law, and the impugned communications were quashed. The petitioners were entitled to be admitted in the course of B. Ed and have their results declared.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners who are students of Kanchan Singh Bhooli Devi Mahavidyalaya, village Bhikhana Pur, Post Sarvankhera, Kanpur- Dehat self financing institution, and have been provided admission in the course of B. Ed, in accordance with the provisions of the Government Orders passed from time to time. The said institution has 100 seats for the course in B. Ed. As per the Government Order dated 2-7-2003 (Annexure-20 to the writ petition) the institution was required to fill up 85% of the students/candidates approved and forwarded by the University to which it is affiliated and 5% of the students to be filled by the Managing Committee at its own level. The University forwarded the names of 85 students in total on various dates on the basis of councilling out of which only 55 candidates reported for admission. All were admitted forthwith. The institution also filled up 15 candidates/students as under the aforesaid Government Order. As per the Government Order dated 14-12-1999 (Annexure-19 to the writ petition) in case, the students recommended by the University did not join the institution and seats remained vacant the institution was required to bring this fact to the notice of the University of the number of the vacancies so that further names by the University could be forwarded for being admitted. The institution informed the University vide letter dated 1-3-2006 (Annexure-14 to the writ petition) wherein it was mentioned that 30 seats had remained unfilled and the names against the vacancies may be forwarded to it within a period of one week so that further action could be taken for filling up the post, failing which, the institute would be entitled to fill up the remaining vacancies on its own level in terms of the said Government Order dated 14-12- 1999. The University instead of forwarding further 30 names of the institution sent a letter dated 22-2-2006 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) followed by letter dated 9-3-2006 (Annexure-16 to the writ petition) by which it asked the institution not to fill up the remaining seats as the number of the faculty as required for imparting education for 100 students was short, and thus the University did not forward the examination forms for 30 students. The institution pursuance of the letter dated 1-3-2006 written to the University for recommending the names of remaining 30 students for filling up the vacancies on not being filled up by the University it filled them at its own level in terms of the Government Order dated 14-12-1999. The institution thereafter imparted education to all the 100 students. Since the University had not forwarded the examination forms the 30 petitioners/students having no alternative filed the present writ petition. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties at length vide interim order dated 8-9-2006, this Court issued a direction that the petitioners would be allowed to appear provisionally in the B. Ed, examination scheduled to commence from 12th September, 2006, however, their results were not to be declared except with the leave of the Court. This interim order was passed as in an identical set of circumstances, this Court had already passed an interim order in the Writ Petition No. 16614 of 2005.

2. In the present case, counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and are on record.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that for no fault of the petitioners the University had wrongly and illegally refrained from issuing the examination forms to them though as per the aforesaid Government Orders the petitioners were entitled to be admitted and take their examination. That the impugned letter dated 22-6-2006 had been issued on no valid ground and seems to be an after thought for settling their scores with each other and is a matter between the University and the institution making the petitioners the scapegoat. That the aforesaid Government Orders have